Massachusetts Election Day

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Light

Thank God for this abortion, nude posing conservative???? I thought you were against people who had these unchristian values. I guess good morals don't apply to him as long as you get what you want.

I thought a man's past doesn't matter, Light, when it comes to elections, remember? Past actions and past associations don't matter! As long as they're good looking and can talk well in front of a microphone, you all don't care about anything else, right? Isn't that the standard you went by when voting for BO? Why all of the sudden your concern that the man has some uncomfortable issues for conservatives?

I hadn't heard about hos stand on abortion, if he is pro-abortion I wouldn't be happy with that, but given the choice between a pro-abortion, fiscal liberal, weak on military and the war on terror Senator walking lock-step witjh this administration and legislative agenda, I'll take a guy who is a fiscal conservative, anti-tax, anti-big govt, pro-military, pro-Gitmo, anti-try the terrorists as criminals, anti-universal healthcare, albeit pro-abortion and a few pics that I might not like from 30 years ago.

How is that hard to process? Its a no-brainer.

Would you want a batter on your team who hits .900 or one who hits .105? No one bats 1.000.

Duh.

[Light]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

I thought a man's past doesn't matter, Light, when it comes to elections, remember? Past actions and past associations don't matter! As long as they're good looking and can talk well in front of a microphone, you all don't care about anything else, right? Isn't that the standard you went by when voting for BO? Why all of the sudden your concern that the man has some uncomfortable issues for conservatives?

I hadn't heard about hos stand on abortion, if he is pro-abortion I wouldn't be happy with that, but given the choice between a pro-abortion, fiscal liberal, weak on military and the war on terror Senator walking lock-step witjh this administration and legislative agenda, I'll take a guy who is a fiscal conservative, anti-tax, anti-big govt, pro-military, pro-Gitmo, anti-try the terrorists as criminals, anti-universal healthcare, albeit pro-abortion and a few pics that I might not like from 30 years ago.

How is that hard to process? Its a no-brainer.

Would you want a batter on your team who hits .900 or one who hits .105? No one bats 1.000.

Duh.

I'm just laughing at the bunch of hypocrites.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Light

I'm just laughing at the bunch of hypocrites.

Must be looking in the mirror...you and your multiple personalities.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Light

I'm just laughing at the bunch of hypocrites.

So hypocrisy is voting for someone who agrees with you 90% of the time versus someone who agrees with you 10% of the time. Okay.

Light, can you name ONE politician you've ever voted for that you agreed with 100% of the time? If you're honest you'll say no. And since that is the truth, by your definition, you're a hypocrite to call such people hypocrites.

You are exercising the classic liberal tactic of if you've lost, start the personal attacks and demonize the opposition. Whatever. The fact remains your hero, Messiah, Savior, isn't working out so well. I thought it would take a first term to manifest itself. Its pretty amazing how quickly the glitter has diminished and the aura has faded. It only took a year...

[DAII]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

You are exercising the classic liberal tactic of if you've lost, start the personal attacks and demonize the opposition. Whatever.

Wow. Sounds like the Republican election 2008 game strategy ... and shortly thereafter.

[Light]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

So hypocrisy is voting for someone who agrees with you 90% of the time versus someone who agrees with you 10% of the time. Okay.

Light, can you name ONE politician you've ever voted for that you agreed with 100% of the time? If you're honest you'll say no. And since that is the truth, by your definition, you're a hypocrite to call such people hypocrites.

You are exercising the classic liberal tactic of if you've lost, start the personal attacks and demonize the opposition. Whatever. The fact remains your hero, Messiah, Savior, isn't working out so well. I thought it would take a first term to manifest itself. Its pretty amazing how quickly the glitter has diminished and the aura has faded. It only took a year...

Can't you get it, it's not about the politician. The stance of many on this board before today was if you vote for someone that is pro choice you are a baby killer. If you vote for a democrat you support abortion. All of a sudden today it's okey dokey to vote for a pro choice politician,WHY, because he will do something you want or has the title REPUBLICAN.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Light

Can't you get it, it's not about the politician. The stance of many on this board before today was if you vote for someone that is pro choice you are a baby killer. If you vote for a democrat you support abortion. All of a sudden today it's okey dokey to vote for a pro choice politician,WHY, because he will do something you want or has the title REPUBLICAN.

I get it. What I don't get are the blanket mischaracterizations of many who don't call people who vote for Dems baby killers. It smacks of sore-loserism.

In a perfect world everyone I vote for agrees with everything I want. If the best I can get is a coalition of fiscal conservatives with fiscal and social cons to stop this very very dangerous experiment with our way of life, I will take it over just about anything I've seen the Democrats roll out. I have voted for our Democrat governor b/c he is a conservative Dem. I voted for a Dem mayor in the town I used to live in for the same reasons.

Since Republicans more often than not are cons versus the Dem party, I tend to vote for the GOP. I DO NOT vote a straight party line ballot. I do vote a straight conservative ballot. If the candidates are not as conservative as I would like, I will vote for the most conservative/less liberal one. If both candidates are liberal I wont vote, although I have never lived in a part of the coutry where that has taken place.

The GOP is dominated by conservatives. You can't be a presidential candidate and be pro abortion. Its been that way since Roe v. Wade. You have to be a pro abortion candidate to be on the Dem ticket. And that's just one issue. There's gun rights, tax policy, military/national defense, traditional marriage, smaller government, conservative fiscal policies, school choice, and a plethora of other issues that persuade me to lean GOP.

The values of the movers and the shakers in the Dem party are liberally bent, therefore I have always voted against them nationally. In the GOP primaries I always vote for the most conservative candidate. I have never been a supporter of the eventual nominee in the primaries except for Reagan in 84. I have Buchanan, Keys and Kasich on my resume of GOP hopefuls in primaries. Once the deal was closed and the choice was a lesser conservative, but certainly much more conservative than the Dem candidate, I have voted for the eventual GOP nominee.

Look at the coalitions in the Democrat Party vs the GOP and its not difficult to understand the logic behind voting for a Republican over a Democrat in a vast majority of the cases. That is, if you are a conservative.

I remain consistent, unless consistency is defined as voting for a candidate who only agrees with me 100% of the time.

[Light]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

I get it. What I don't get are the blanket mischaracterizations of many who don't call people who vote for Dems baby killers. It smacks of sore-loserism.

In a perfect world everyone I vote for agrees with everything I want. If the best I can get is a coalition of fiscal conservatives with fiscal and social cons to stop this very very dangerous experiment with our way of life, I will take it over just about anything I've seen the Democrats roll out. I have voted for our Democrat governor b/c he is a conservative Dem. I voted for a Dem mayor in the town I used to live in for the same reasons.

Since Republicans more often than not are cons versus the Dem party, I tend to vote for the GOP. I DO NOT vote a straight party line ballot. I do vote a straight conservative ballot. If the candidates are not as conservative as I would like, I will vote for the most conservative/less liberal one. If both candidates are liberal I wont vote, although I have never lived in a part of the coutry where that has taken place.

The GOP is dominated by conservatives. You can't be a presidential candidate and be pro abortion. Its been that way since Roe v. Wade. You have to be a pro abortion candidate to be on the Dem ticket. And that's just one issue. There's gun rights, tax policy, military/national defense, traditional marriage, smaller government, conservative fiscal policies, school choice, and a plethora of other issues that persuade me to lean GOP.

The values of the movers and the shakers in the Dem party are liberally bent, therefore I have always voted against them nationally. In the GOP primaries I always vote for the most conservative candidate. I have never been a supporter of the eventual nominee in the primaries except for Reagan in 84. I have Buchanan, Keys and Kasich on my resume of GOP hopefuls in primaries. Once the deal was closed and the choice was a lesser conservative, but certainly much more conservative than the Dem candidate, I have voted for the eventual GOP nominee.

Look at the coalitions in the Democrat Party vs the GOP and its not difficult to understand the logic behind voting for a Republican over a Democrat in a vast majority of the cases. That is, if you are a conservative.

I remain consistent, unless consistency is defined as voting for a candidate who only agrees with me 100% of the time.

I am not accusing you personally but I do have a question.

Where were you and the others who today are defending the right for a christian to vote for a pro choice person??? When 3 or 4 preachers and a few ladies on this board were condemning me saying I could not be a christian because I supported Obama a man that is pro choice and for gay rights?

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Light

I am not accusing you personally but I do have a question.

Where were you and the others who today are defending the right for a christian to vote for a pro choice person??? When 3 or 4 preachers and a few ladies on this board were condemning me saying I could not be a christian because I supported Obama a man that is pro choice and for gay rights?

I'm not on here that often. I was probably doing something productive.

My dad is a yellow-dog Democrat. He's also the finest Christian I know. He is a prayer warrior, fasts every Wednesday, a soul winner, a giver and has a reputation that is impeccable. He simply votes as a Depression Era, FDR southern Democrat. He was a phone man for 45 years and a union man for 25 years. He votes on the premise that Democrats represent the "little guy" like him and the GOP is all about the wealthy. Its an outdated paradigm imo, but he's 75 and I won't change him. If he doesn't go to heaven simply b/c he votes Democrat, I don't have a rat's chance to make it, b/c I fall far short of the man of God that he is. He doesn't like abortion or gay rights. Its all economics to him. I told him over Christmas that he would be perfect if he wasn't a Democrat. He had to at least have one flaw. His response? "If I weren't a Democrat, I'd be ashamed".

So I'm sorry you were called a babykiller some time ago. That's not a fair characterization. And it is hypocritical for people who have said such to call you so and then celebrate the election of Scott Brown.